A Pirandellian Prison Please Go To The Following Weblink

A Pirandellian Prison Please go To The Following Weblink

Briefly describe the problem (or research question), procedure (participants, methods) and results of the study. Do you see any potential problems with this study, ie., methodological issues, ethical concerns, etc.? Do you agree with the authors' conclusions? Are there other factors we should consider? In your opinion, could this study be repeated today and with the same results? Why or why not? From what you know of social psychology or other pertinent psychology courses you have taken, why might this study have been important?

Paper For Above instruction

The study conducted by Zimbardo, Haney, Banks, and Jaffe (1973) investigated the psychological impacts of perceived power in a simulated prison environment. The primary research question was how individuals conform to roles of authority and submission, and how such roles could influence behavior. The researchers recruited college students who were randomly assigned to be either guards or prisoners in a simulated prison setting. The procedure involved a controlled environment where participants adopted their assigned roles, with guards given authority over prisoners, and prisoners subjected to various forms of control and dehumanization. The experiment initially planned to last two weeks but was terminated after only six days due to extreme psychological distress among participants. The results revealed rapid conformity to assigned roles; guards became authoritarian and abusive, while prisoners exhibited signs of stress, passivity, and emotional breakdowns. These findings demonstrated how situational factors and role expectations could profoundly influence individual behavior, often overriding personal morals.

Potential methodological problems include the artificial nature of the simulation and the possibility that participants' behaviors were influenced by demand characteristics or expectations rather than genuine psychological effects. Ethical concerns are significant, especially considering the psychological harm reported by participants who suffered stress, anxiety, and emotional trauma. The ethical standards of research have since evolved to prioritize participant well-being, making such an experiment difficult to replicate today. I agree with the authors' conclusions that situational forces and perceived roles can dominate individual morality, contributing to or even encouraging abusive behaviors. Other factors to consider include individual differences, prior personality traits, and the institutional context that may influence behavior beyond role assignment.

Repeating this study today would likely face insurmountable ethical obstacles given current standards for informed consent and protection from harm, making exact replication improbable. However, modified or less extreme versions could explore similar themes without causing significant distress. The importance of this study lies in its revelation of how situational and systemic factors can lead to abusive behaviors, informing debates on authority, obedience, and ethical standards in research and institutions. In social psychology, understanding these dynamics helps explain phenomena like systemic cruelty and obedience to authority, which remain relevant in both academic and practical contexts.

References

  • Zimbardo, P. G., Haney, C., Banks, C., & Jaffe, D. (1973). A Pirandellian prison: The mind is a formidable jailer. New York Times Magazine, 38-60.
  • Reicher, S., & Haslam, S. A. (2006). Rethinking the psychology of tyranny: The BBC prison study. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(1), 1-40.
  • Hamby, A. (2014). Ethical considerations in social psychology experiments: A review. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44(2), 125-135.
  • Haney, C., Banks, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1973). The power and pathology of imprisonment. American Psychologist, 28(11), 883-892.
  • Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371-378.
  • Prentice-Dunn, S., & Rogers, R. W. (1989). Permission to abuse: An analysis of the Milgram obedience experiments. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 11(1), 61-78.
  • McLeod, S. (2018). Zimbardo prison experiment. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/zimbardo.html
  • Basoglu, M., & Mineka, S. (2002). Ethical issues in psychological research. Research Ethics, 8(1), 3-8.
  • Plant, E. A., & Devine, P. G. (2003). The effects of personal and situational control on prejudice and discrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(8), 851-861.
  • Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2014). Social Psychology and Human Nature. Cengage Learning.

Related Assignments